Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'College Football Soundoff' started by jantydog, Jun 1, 2017.
Devin Nunes: No credible evidence of Russia-Trump collusion - USA TODAY
I have to hand it to the leftists. They hve successfully changed the narrative from jobs and fhe economy to the red scare.
Very frank underwoodish in this seasons house of cards
I again refer back to whitewater lasting almost five years.
CNN and the rest of the liberals are going to latch onto anything that might make Trump look bad. They are still angry from the election and will do anything to bring him down.
Talking Taxes: What’s Your Fair Share? - The Wall Street Journal
Quirky little video but lays out the issuepretty clearly
Hillary should be ashamed of herself after the lies she told yesterday.
Now she is trashing the DNC.
She is suffering from TDS as well.
Comey can't say he was pressured to stop the Flynn investigation because it would contradict his previous testimony. That he has never experienced a President trying to stop and influence an investigation.
1st page! Carry on, hucklefvcks and snowflakes.
We's still angry!
Well, you might as well get over it. Half the time, your candidate is going to lose. You can hate all you want but nothing will change. I know this from personal experience.
We made it thru Obama....we can make it thru Trump.
How did Obama hurt you?
I know there is a thread on beheading and all below but I wonder what Kathy would think if she got to see some of the actual videos and pictures of ISIS fighters beheading babies in the Middle East. Maybe try to make another Joke?
Babies, Children, Mothers. Civilians. Not just grown men. Babies.
Religion of Peace is really not a fair description.
Is it June already? Man, this year is flying by..
You do realize Comey's comment was about whether the Justice Department or Attorney General had halted or attempted to halt any active FBI Investigation, not about the President. It helps to read the entire transcript instead of regurgitating talking points you hear on Fox News.
SEN. MAZIE HIRONO (D-HI): Yes. And so speaking of the independence of not just the judiciary but I'd like you to clarify the FBI's independence from the DOJ apparatus. Can the FBI conduct an investigation independent from the department of Justice. Or does the FBI have to disclose all it's (sic) investigations to the DOJ? And does it have to get the Attorney General's consent?
COMEY: Well we work with the Department of Justice, whether that's main justice or U.S. attorney's offices on all of our investigations.
And so we work with them and so in a legal sense we're not independent of the department of justice. We are spiritually, culturally pretty independent group and that's the way you would want it. But yes, we work with the Department of Justice on all of our investigations.
HIRONO: So if the Attorney General or senior officials at the Department of Justice opposes a specific investigation, can they halt that FBI investigation?
COMEY: In theory yes.
HIRONO: Has it happened?
COMEY: Not in my experience. Because it would be a big deal to tell the FBI to stop doing something that -- without an appropriate purpose. I mean where oftentimes they give us opinions that we don't see a case there and so you ought to stop investing resources in it. But I'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for a political reason, that would be a very big deal. It's not happened in my experience.
This is not true.
How has Trump hurt you?
You give her WAY too much credit.
Thinking isn't her strong suit.
Nunes doesn't have any credibility on this issue.
You too shall see the light
The Light that Shines so bright
It's almost as if he was reading fake news.
And afraid. Don't forget ...we might all LITERALLY die.
Here for no other reason except to get on page 1 for a change.
Besides that--HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!!!! TRUMP IS GONNA START WW3 AND IT'S TIME FOR THE NUKES!!!!!!
My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such a violent reaction against it?… Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if i did that, then my argument against God collapsed too–for the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies. Thus, in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist – in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless – I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality – namely my idea of justice – was full of sense. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never have known it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.
~ C.S. Lewis
If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life on this planet was also an accident, and the whole evolution of Man was an accident too. If so, then all our present thoughts are mere accidents – the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists and astronomers as well as for anyone else’s. But if their thoughts – i.e., Materialism and Astronomy – are mere accidental by-products, why should we believe them to be true? I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents. It’s like expecting the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account of how the jug was made and why it was upset.
~ C.S. Lewis
The problem with this thread is that posters approach it like a debate, in which there are clear "winners" and "losers". The main objective is to convince your opponents that you're right and they are wrong. Climate change arguments are a great example of this debate mentality, but the problem is that posters just become more entrenched in their initial positions. Insults, memes, and fake news all further the debate track.
If you care about remedying the political paralysis we're currently in, we should approach these conversations as a discussion, in which there are no winners/losers. The main objective should be an exploration of objective facts and data as a means of finding truth, and diagnosing and solving social problems. To further the discussion track, we should focus on asking more questions (vs. broad declarations), data (vs. memes), etc.
Don't expect anyone to take any of that seriously; just a suggestion to improve the quality of the politics thread!
I do think on issues like climate change, much of the real concern is over policy decisions rather than the science behind it. Many would be more open regarding the science if they felt acknowledging changes in climate didn't have to be accompanied by accepting higher taxes and other measures purported to "fix" something that most likely cannot be fixed.
You have too much faith in the posters of this board. Great idea. Will never happen.
Who does in your opinion? Pelosi? Other democrats?
I think too much time is spent on politics rather than issues. Issues are far more interesting to discuss.
Agreed, but when you look at who the audience is, any discussions on issues will always be overshadowed by the overwhelming number of retards that are on display every day in this thread.
The 21 Coptic Christians, murdered by ISIS in Feb 2015, martyrs for Jesus Christ. Making a joke about beheading is tragic.
WHAT!!!! You want to ruin our absolutely wonderful bitch fest? You heinous fiend!!!!
True, but at the very least I'll try to follow my own advice
We have plenty of thoughtful and intelligent posters. Most avoid this thread because of the extreme positions dominating.
I am against most policies designed to "address climate change". But I find climate science quite interesting.
//Making a joke about beheading is tragic.\\
More like stupid and yet with the angst and insanity spewed by the left since Nov it goes entirely with their frame of mind.
It is such a pathetic display that even some leftists have shown their disgust with it.
Nah, I obviously keep coming back to this thread because I enjoy it.
But I see a growing gridlock (if not outright hostility) in civil discourse. Meaning that I expect our elected dumbasses to not get anything done in DC, but I don't expect to see that among regular folks. But that's whats happening - people are so entrenched that compromises aren't even possible in social settings anymore
I agree fully with your statement, it's just a shame that the stupidity of the masses overshadows some of the very intelligent people we have on this board, especially in this thread.